McCaul and Warner fear the Burr-Feinstein approach would be ineffective, potentially weakening security and damaging global competitiveness for American tech firms.

Instead, the pair want a national commission to study how authorities can maintain security with the proliferation of modern technology.The group would bring together privacy advocates, technologists and law enforcement officials to create technological and legislative proposals within a year.

Encryption has been a hot topic on Capitol Hill since Apple defied an FBI-requested court order seeking help unlocking an iPhone used by one of the San Bernardino shooters.

Law enforcement officials have been warning that encryption is increasingly helping terrorists and criminals “go dark” and hide from investigators. They want tech companies to provide investigators with some type of guaranteed access to locked data.

But the tech community has resisted, arguing that unbreakable security is integral to digital security and online privacy.

With the two sides at loggerheads, lawmakers on both sides of the argument increasingly believe Capitol Hill must settle the debate with legislation.

But they haven’t been able to decide what that legislation should look like.

The Burr-Feinstein proposal hasn’t been released yet, but the idea hasn’t gained much traction in the House or Senate.

In January, Johnson indicated he had concerns about the Burr-Feinstein efforts, arguing that the bill might “do more harm than good.”

“Is it really going to solve any problems if we force our companies to do something here in the U.S.?” he asked. “It’s just going to move offshore. Determined actors, terrorists, are still going to be able to find a service provider that will be able to encrypt accounts.”